Even though it is likely that most mainstream editors and publishers will forbid any of their journalists to write about this very important, well-documented issue (which endangers the health of the world’s humans), I nevertheless submit it to a select list of journalists. Please study it carefully (and ethically). It is surely NEWS THAT’S FIT TO PRINT (except perhaps for Big Media outlets like the NY Times, it appears).

Though neither one is good, allowing Big Pharma/Big Medicine to pollute our children’s (and also adult’s) bodies and brains (the internal environment)with known neurotoxic substances, the reality of over-vaccinating humans (especially babies) is worse in many ways than “just” allowing multinational mining corporations, in league with both our elected representatives and our appointed (DNR, PCA, EPA, Forestry, etc) officials, to pollute our external/natural environment with water-endangering, sociopathic, polluting, foreign corporations such as PolyMet/Glencore, Twin Metals/Antofagasta, all of which will be above the law if and when environmental catastrophes happen like they did at the now closing copper mine at Mount Polley, British Colombia, at the Samarco mine in Brazil, etc, etc,. Gary

“Yet they are rarely told that their immunocompromised child might actually develop measles due to being vaccinated (!) with the attenuated, live viruses that are in the vaccine or catch the measles from a newly vaccinated classmate who could easily shed the contagious vaccine viruses for weeks after the shot..”

A Board-Certified Internist’s Response to the New York Times Editorial Board’s Recent Opinion Piece That Exposed Both the Board’s Horrifying Ignorance About America’s Over-vaccination Epidemic and Its (Probable) Bias Toward Its Lucrative Big Pharma Investment Portfolios

It is important to note that none of the NY Times editorial board members are either physicians or scientists. Therefore, none of them could have had any expertise in the true (non-corporate-influenced) science or true (non-corporate-influenced) history of vaccinology. The board member’s opinions therefore are similar to what the heavily-propagandized public has repeatedly heard from 1) Big Pharma; 2) Big Pharma’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, the CDC and the FDA; 3) Big Media (whose biased corporate advertisers are largely uber-wealthy pharmaceutical companies); 4) Big Pharma’s shareholders (who are benefitting from the vaccine industry’s soaring stock prices and dividends); and 5) Big Medicine (whose physicians and increasingly monopolistic clinics and hospitals profit enormously from more and more known-to-be-neurotoxic infant vaccines – which are now so numerous that they have to be injected into the tiny muscles of tiny infants in cocktail combinations that have never been tested for safety even in guinea pig labs!).

(The editorial board represents the opinions of the board, its editor and the publisher. It is separate from the newsroom and the Op-Ed section.)

The New York Times has just come out with an editorial and a backgrounder that favor the elimination of vaccine exemptions. The means by which vaccines are coerced is via denying a public (and in some states a private) education to children who have not received every state-designated immunization. The myth justifying this tyrannical penalty is that unvaccinated children pose a considerable risk of infection to their schoolmates and friends.

After a child suffers a vaccine injury, parents subsequently often choose to reduce their children’s vaccinations. By requiring children from families in which there is a pre-existing vaccine injury to be vaccinated or forgo an education, we can expect a higher rate of vaccine injuries in those who are forced to comply.

Do Vaccine Mandates Improve the Public’s Health or Pharma’s Health? The Examples of Measles, Mumps and Rubella (German Measles)

The NY Times editors write that “public health can prevail.” And it should. Let’s examine the true magnitude of the risk to public health we face today from 3 well known childhood viruses.

MEASLES

Measles is said to be the most severe of the common childhood viral diseases, and it is the most contagious. Yet despite all the hoopla over measles, there have been only 3 measles deaths in the US since 2000. According to the CDC, “measles cases in the US occur as a result of importations by people who were infected while in other countries and from transmission that may occur from those importations…” Apart from cases coming in from overseas, measles does not otherwise circulate in the US.

In 2003, two Americans died from measles: a 75 year-old male who was exposed to measles in Israel, and a 13 year-old who had received a bone marrow transplant 3 months before his death, and was severely immunocompromised. “Despite an intensive search, no additional cases were detected in the surrounding area.”

The next (and last) time someone died I the US with measles was in 2015, A middle-aged, immunosuppressed woman with pre-existing conditions died from pneumonia. Only on autopsy was she found to have measles.

It is unclear whether any of these 3 deaths were due to a measles virus originating from a vaccine, but it is certainly possible. The vaccine for measles is a live, attenuated virus that can occasionally cause measles disease and/or be transmitted to immunocompromised individuals by a vaccine recipient.

On average, there are about 250 cases of measles reported annually in the US (250 out of 327,000,000, the population of the US), which equates to 0.2 deaths annually (essentially 0 out of 327,000,000).

MUMPS

On average, there are 2,500 cases of mumps reported in the US yearly (2,500 out of 327,000,000). The mumps vaccine is less efficacious than the measles or rubella vaccine, with an estimated 86% efficacy after two shots (86% only represents the relative increase in the anti-mumps titer following the recommended 2 doses). The efficacy rate increase does not represent how much protection is offered by the inoculations). Indeed, immunity wanes significantly 3-5 years following vaccination.

According to CDC, “There have been zero mumps-related deaths (0 out of 327,000,000) reported in the US during recent mumps outbreaks.”

RUBELLA (German Measles)

What about rubella, a virus that has only historical significance in that it was capable of causing fetal malformations in rubella-infected pregnant women? Rubella was declared eliminated from the US in 2004. “Since 2012, all rubella cases had evidence that they were infected when they were living or traveling outside of the US.”

According to the CDC, fewer than 10 people are diagnosed annually in the US with rubella (10 out of 327,000,000 people) and zero have died (0 out of 327,000,000), and the rubella patients had acquired the benign rash outside the US.

I hope I have made it clear that the risk of measles, mumps and rubella posed by unvaccinated children to both healthy Americans, and to immune-compromised Americans is very close to zero. The same holds for other conditions for which children are vaccinated.

Vaccinating High Risk Children Will Produce a Larger Public Health Problem Than Not Vaccinating Them

In fact, there exists no reliable evidence that unvaccinated children in the US pose a serious threat to anyone. The claim that they do is an urban legend promulgated by Big Pharma and its wholly owned subsidiary, the CDC. (It is important to note that the CDC purchases $5 Billion dollars-worth of vaccines annually for the “Vaccines for Children” program, by far its largest line item. Then CDC aggressively tries to convince the country to consume them.)

Yet how many column-inches, how many hours of TV news programs have been devoted to scaring the American public about the dire threat of measles? Fear of measles has been the major driver of the campaigns to eliminate vaccine exemptions. Parents of immunocompromised children have been incited to frenzy about the risks posed to their children by unvaccinated classmates.

Yet they are rarely told that their immunocompromised child might actually develop measles due to being vaccinated (!) with the attenuated, live viruses that are in the vaccine or catch the measles from a newly vaccinated classmate who could easily shed the contagious vaccine viruses for weeks after the shot..

Who Really Benefits From This Hue and Cry?

Only vaccine manufacturers, whose market is forcibly expanded, while these same manufacturers face no liability for consequent vaccine injuries.

The greater public health risk is actually posed by vaccines – to children who are at higher than average risk of a vaccine injury. The CDC acknowledges this risk in its Vaccine Information Statement (VIS) for the MMR vaccine, which says, “Some people should not get this vaccine.”

Included in the VIS list of those who should not receive the vaccine are those with allergies to vaccine components; adverse reactions to a prior dose of the vaccine; those possibly pregnant; the immunocompromised; those with immune system problems; or those who have a close relative with immune system problems; and “other conditions”.

Yet some children with these conditions will surely be required to be vaccinated if exemptions are removed. In the 30 years’ duration of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 89,000 adverse reactions and 445 deaths in total have been reported for measles vaccines alone. These numbers dwarf the tiny number of infections that might be related to unvaccinated children.

Remember, no deaths – zero – from measles, mumps or rubella have been attributed to infections carried by unvaccinated children during the past 20 years in the US. Very few infections have even been imputed to them, either.

There is no scientific or public health reason to force children who are perceived by their parents to be at high risk of a reaction to be vaccinated, when the facts show that the threat they pose to the rest of us is marginal to none.

Q: How could the Times get this so wrong? A: Re-read the beginning of this column.

Meryl Nass is a board-certified internal medicine doctor. She practices Integrative Internal Medicine in Maine.Dr Nass sees patients with challenging disorders, those who wish to reduce their medications and/or use diet and lifestyle changes to improve health.

She is passionate about improving the lives of her patients and therefore spends hours with each new, complex patient, until she understands how to explain their symptoms and develop a comprehensive treatment plan.

She believes in medicine’s First, Do No Harm ethic and therefore has been on the front lines of vaccine controversies, lecturing around the US and testifying to 6 Congressional committees about the problems with the military’s anthrax vaccine (and sometimes other vaccines). Her goal for her patients is to use a minimum of medications and avoid iatrogenic harms (“iatrogenic” = doctor-, vaccine- or prescription drug-caused disorders).

Dr Nass opened her new medical practice because there were no local physicians treating chronic, complex disorders like Lyme–despite the large number of affected patients.

In order to make her unique practice work, she does not accept any insurance plans.